[Telepathy] Spec discussion notes: advertising running applications, listing calls you could join

Tomeu Vizoso tomeu at tomeuvizoso.net
Thu Apr 8 02:34:22 PDT 2010


On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 19:14, Will Thompson
<will.thompson at collabora.co.uk> wrote:
>
> == Connection.Interface.Applications; Channel.Interface.Application ==
>
> Tomeu's been working on standardizing some Sugar-specific functionality
> to allow the user to see what their contacts are up to (in particular,
> what kind of collaborative tasks they're working on using Tubes).
> Sjoerd, Simon, he and myself discussed it a bit.
>
> spec branch: http://git.collabora.co.uk/?p=user/tomeu/telepathy-spec.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/application-presence
> HTML: http://people.collabora.co.uk/~tomeu/telepathy-spec-application_presence/spec/

Thanks, have updated those links in order to address the comments.

Regards,

Tomeu

> === Minor comments ===
>
> Should probably have a token to use with Connection.Interface.Contacts.
>
> Remove the unneeded String_String_Map re-definition from
> Channel.Interface.Application
>
> The method should be AdvertiseApplication (rather than Advertise, which
> is too generic). And, Sjoerd thinks the ”Application” moniker is
> sub-ideal.)
>
> === Representation of applications ===
>
> Applications should be represented as an a{sv}, not an (suss), matching
> channel properties. So Contact_Application_Map would become a{uaa{sv}}.
>
>  { ChannelType: DBusTube,
>    ...,
>    Channel.Type.DBusTube.ServiceName: 'org.gnome.AbiWord',
>  }
>
> Maybe we want a human-readable name for each application as well? So
> that my UI can say “Rob is editing Confidential_Report.odt” even if I
> don't have a tube-enabled AbiWord installed. So perhaps applications
> should be represented by two a{sv}s: one the set of immutable properties
> that you could feed to EnsureChannel to get a channel for that
> application (namely, immutable and requestable properties for the
> channel), the other a bunch of other metadata about the application
> (like the document name) to show to the user. So in fact
> Contact_Application_Map would become a{ua(a{sv}a{sv})} — mapping handles
> to lists of (properties to feed to EnsureChannel, extra metadata)
> tuples.
>
> Having three <code>a{sv}</code>s — one for channel properties, one for
> application metadata, one for tube parameters — seemed like a lot to
> Will, but he was convinced that it's okay: you never really want to pass
> stuff to Offer() anyway. And separating the stuff that you pass to
> EnsureChannel() to get involved in the activity from the stuff
> describing the activity is good. (Maybe you want to include a screenshot
> in the metadata, for instance.)
>
> Simon wonders whether, rather than using a struct ( a{sv}: stuff you
> should pass to EnsureChannel, a{sv}: Metadata ), we should just use an
> a{sv} of metadata with a key whose value is the stuff you should pass to
> EnsureChannel. A tad easier to work with with dbus-glib, but others
> reckoned it would be more opaque maybe, and having it be a struct means
> apps don't have to deal with it being missing.
>
> Application-specific metadata seems like a good way to go. This allows
> each application to deal with the question of “what does it mean to be
> the same activity?” in its own way: perhaps the document name, perhaps
> some uuid, whatever. On Sugar, this is done by just generating a UUID
> for the room name; this breaks down if two different groups of people
>  are editing two separate documents in the XMPP MUC
>  devel at conference.telepathy.im (which is impossible with the Sugar UI
>  but is a reasonably likely situation in a desktop UI).
>
> If an application uses >1 channel for a single activity, it could either
> use the metadata dictionary to tie them together, or just Advertise()
> one of the channels (if you have 1 control channel and a bunch of data
> channels, just advertise the first one).
>
> Do we want to have a well-known metadata key for some kind of
> human-readable thing that you can show to the user to say “hey this guy
> is playing chess but you don't have chess installed”? But this has
> localization issues. An alternative is to hook up the (e.g.) D-Bus tube
> service name to PackageKit so your information on a contact could have a
> "three other application..." thing which you click and it offers you a
> list of apps you could install to get involved. This seems more useful
> than “Rob's playing Chess. You can't.”. So we don't need any extra
> machinery for this.
>
> But we do want a normal channel property for the subject anyway? And
> then we can re-use it on MUCs and be happy.
>
> So perhaps the keys of the metadata should be namespaced, so that they
> can include mutable channel properties, unioned with
> application-specific keys, so that if there *is* a standard Telepathy
> property for a metadatum (is that a word?) it can be exposed with that
> name.
>
> In conclusion, we think a Contact_Application_Map dict might look
> something like this (for a handle <code>42</code>):
>
>  { 42: [ ( { 'o.fd.T.Channel.ChannelType': 'o.fd.T.C.Type.DBusTube',
>              'o.fd.T.Channel.TargetHandleType': Room,
>              'o.fd.T.Channel.TargetID': 'devel at conference.telepathy.im',
>              'o.fd.T.C.T.DBusTube.ServiceName': 'org.gnome.abiword',
>            },
>            {
>              # standard channel properties which shouldn't be included
>              # in the channel request but which provide useful
>              # information:
>              # (Subject's non-standard, but it should be standard.)
>              'o.fd.T.Channel.Subject': 'Hypothetical spec extension',
>
>              # Also application-specific properties:
>              'org.gnome.abiword.DocumentID': '0xDEADBEEF',
>            }
>          ),
>          ...
>        ],
>  }
>
> The above would have been advertised by calling methods on the tube
> channel:
>
>  # To set the subject, hypothetical API
>  org.fd.DBus.Properties.Set('org.fd.T.Channel', 'Subject',
>                             'Hypothetical spec extension')
>  # And for application-specific metadata:
>  AdvertiseApplication( { 'org.gnome.abiword.DocumentID': '0xDEADBEEF' })
>
> == Other similar issues that need solving ===
>
> Consider:
>
> * I'm invited to a Muji call in foo at conf.bar
> * I join, and join the call
> * I leave the ''call'' but stay in the ''MUC''
>
> How do we represent that there's a call going on?
>
> Simon suggests: maybe we could represent them as applications with
> contact handle 0:
>
>  { 0:  [ ({ 'o.fd.T.Channel.ChannelType': 'o.fd.T.C.Type.Call',
>             'o.fd.T.Channel.TargetHandleType': Room,
>             'o.fd.T.Channel.TargetID': 'foo at conf.bar',
>           },
>           { 'o.fd.T.Channel.I.Group.Members': [42, 57, ...],
>           }
>          )
>        ],
>    42: [ ... ],
>  }
>
> or we could change the type entirely, to a(a{sv}a{sv}) — using an alist
> not a dict because we can't use dicts as dict keys:
>
>  [
>    ( { 'o.fd.T.Channel.ChannelType': 'o.fd.T.C.Type.DBusTube',
>        'o.fd.T.Channel.TargetHandleType': Room,
>        'o.fd.T.Channel.TargetID': 'devel at conference.telepathy.im',
>        'o.fd.T.C.T.DBusTube.ServiceName': 'org.gnome.abiword',
>      },
>      { 'org.fd.Telepathy.Channel.Interface.Group.Members':
>          [ 42, 45, my cat, ... ]
>        # what do we do if different people say different subjects?
>        # impl detail
>        'o.fd.T.Channel.Subject': 'Hypothetical spec extension',
>        'org.gnome.abiword.DocumentID': '0xDEADBEEF',
>      }
>    )
>  ]
>
> This would let us express the calls that are going on in an XMPP MUC you
> happen to be in (and also to represent tubes in a MUC that you happen to
> be in) even if you aren't auto-invited, or if you were, but you left the
> call.
>
> It also neatly solves the problem of trying to tell who's in the same
> application session... although it does actually mean Gabble has to know
> somehow. And it makes the API a bit harder to use for the “what is John
> doing?” case.
>
> A bunch of different use-cases:
>
> * What is Simon doing?
> * How can I know that there's a call going on in the MUC that I happen
>  to be in?
> * Show me all the documents my friends are editing.
> ** Sugar-style one activity per person based on focus
> ** elsewhere-style multitasking: everyone's "doing" everything they have
>   running
> *** could we express the former as a well-known metadata key Focused:
>    True?
> *** simon thinks we could!
> *** metadata churn: republish the entire dict every time.
> *** should the interface show updates as a diff?
>
> Left this as something to ponder.
>
> --
> Will
> _______________________________________________
> telepathy mailing list
> telepathy at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/telepathy
>


More information about the telepathy mailing list